The ACLU is offering free legal advice to booksellers on how to protect customers' privacy if served with a subpoena or search warrant. Under the 2001 Patriot Act, "the Government can obtain records of a person’s book purchases as part of an intelligence investigation, without evidence that the buyer is suspected of committing a crime."

In a letter to booksellers, the ACLU quoted Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas during the McCarthy era: "If a customer ‘can be required to disclose what she read yesterday and what she will read tomorrow, fear will take the place of freedom in the libraries, bookstores, and homes of the land.’"

Among the tips contained in the letter:

"Bookstores may consult with ACLU attorneys without charge, and if we decide to represent a bookstore in litigation, there would also be no charge. Please note that although some warrants or subpoenas may contain language that prohibits the bookstore from notifying other persons about the search, these provisions do not prevent a bookstore from consulting with an attorney about how to respond to a subpoena."

"Probably the strongest method of protecting customer privacy is simply not to retain unnecessary records. A subpoena or search warrant cannot force anyone to disclose records that do not exist. For some booksellers, it may be useful to develop systems to delete personal or unnecessary information about customers. Indeed, such a practice might be a selling point for customers who care about their privacy."

For more on this, see the New York Times article, "Librarians Receive Advice on Law and Reader Privacy":

"Concerned about how federal access to their records would undermine readers' privacy, thousands of librarians gathered today around the country to hear televised advice about how to respond to government requests under last year's antiterrorism law."

"Although some of the librarians calling in from among the 250 sites in a national teleconference suggested defiance of the 2001 USA Patriot Act, all the speakers said proper federal requests for data should be dutifully complied with, but only when a proper court order was served and not just because an F.B.I. agent asked for information. "

"New York City police officials on Wednesday dropped a request to submit secret evidence to a federal court in their fight to loosen federal limits on police surveillance of political organizations. Groups that support the surveillance restrictions -- which require the NYPD to have suspicion of criminal activity before monitoring political groups -- say the request to submit secret evidence was unprecedented for a local police force."

"The department had contended that the secret evidence -- testimony from David Cohen, deputy commissioner of intelligence -- would help prove that officers investigating terrorism can no longer afford to wait for signs of criminal activity before monitoring political groups."

"Franklin Siegel, a professor at City University of New York School of Law and an attorney for the plaintiffs, said the request to submit secret evidence to help decide the merits of a case was unparalleled in the context of local, rather than federal, law enforcement in the United States. "There are no state precedents," he said."

The New York Times reports on the Administration's new tools for domestic spying...and qualms about them:

"From New York City to Seattle, police officials are looking to do away with rules that block them from spying on people and groups without evidence that a crime has been committed. They say these rules, forced on them in the 1970's and 80's to halt abuses, now prevent them from infiltrating mosques and other settings where terrorists might plot. "

"At the same time, federal and local police agencies are looking for systematic, high-tech ways to root out terrorists before they strike. In a sense, the scuba dragnet was cumbersome, old-fashioned police work, albeit on a vast scale. Now officials are hatching elaborate plans for dumping gigabytes of delicate information into big computers, where it would be blended with public records and stirred with sophisticated software. "

"In recent days, federal law enforcement officials have spoken ambitiously and often about their plans to remake the F.B.I. as a domestic counterterrorism agency. But the spy story has been unfolding, quietly and sometimes haltingly, for more than a year now, since the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. "

"Some people in law enforcement remain unconvinced that all these new tools are needed, and some experts are skeptical that high-tech data mining will bring much of value to light."

"Still, civil libertarians increasingly worry about how law enforcement might wield its new powers. They say the nation is putting at risk the very thing it is fighting for: the personal freedoms and rights embodied in the Constitution. Moreover, they say, authorities with powerful technology will inevitably blunder, as became evident in October when an audit revealed that the Navy had lost nearly two dozen computers authorized to process classified information."

There's much, much more. Go over and read the whole thing.

We love it! The ACLU's anti-Ashcroft televsion ad. View it here.

(Via Politics in the Zeros)

Christopher H. Pyle teaches constitutional law and civil liberties at Mount Holyoke and is the author of an op-ed article in the Hartford Courant. He has first hand experience and information about his topic.

Read what he has to say about Poindexter and the Pentagon's proposed Total Information Awareness (TIA) program --the title of his op-ed is Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid, of Spying by the U.S. Army. (via Buzzflash).

First, as background:

"This isn’t the first time that the military has slipped the bounds of law to spy on civilians. In the late 1960s, it secretly collected personal information on more than a million law-abiding Americans in a misguided effort to quell anti-war demonstrations, predict riots and discredit protesters. I know because in 1970, as a former captain in Army intelligence, I disclosed the existence of that program."

Here's what Pyle says about Poindexter's plan:

"Under Poindexter’s plan, the Army’s Intelligence and Security Command, headquartered at Fort Belvoir, Va., will use high-powered computers to secretly search the e-mail messages, credit-card purchases, phone records and bank statements of hundreds of thousands of people on the chance that they might be associated with, or sympathetic to, terrorists."

"Much of INSCOM’S information will be sent to the Army’s new Northern Command, which is supposed to provide perimeter security, crowd control and technical assistance to civilian agencies in the aftermath of terrorist attacks. Nothing in the Northern Command’s mission requires it to keep dossiers on anti-war demonstrators or Muslim Americans, but the Northern Command expects to receive so many reports on individual terrorists and their sympathizers that it is planning to employ 150 people just to read them."

"The scale of this operation suggests that the Army is not just preparing to clear streets, defuse bombs and provide emergency services. It’s too early to tell how far the Army will actually go with its plans, but it is not too early to start asking questions."

In 1997, then Senator John Ashcroft had a far different view on the expansion of electronic surveillance than he holds now. He wrote the following op-ed piece in the August 12, 1997 Washington Times (available on lexis.com):

"Welcoming Big Brother"

"The Clinton administration would like the capability to read any international computer communications. Government agencies want access to decode, digest and discuss financial transactions, personal e-mail and proprietary information sent abroad - all in the name of national security. To accomplish this, President Clinton would like government agencies to have the keys for decoding all exported U.S. software and Internet communications.

This proposed policy raises obvious concerns about Americans' privacy, in addition to tampering with the competitive advantage that U.S. software companies currently enjoy in the field of encryption technology. Not only would Big Brother be looming over the shoulders of international cybersurfers, but he threatens to render our state-of-the-art computer software engineers obsolete and unemployed. There is a concern that the Internet could be used to commit crimes and that advanced encryption could disguise such activity. However, we do not provide the government with phone jacks outside our homes for unlimited wiretaps. Why, then, should be grant government the Orwellian capability to listen at will and in real time to our communications across the Web?

The protections of the Fourth Amendment are clear. The right to protection from unlawful searches is an indivisible American value. Two hundred years of court decisions have stood in defense of this fundamental right. The state's interest in effective crime-fighting should never violate the people's Bill of Rights. (emphasis supplied)

The president has proposed that American software companies supply the government with decryption keys to high-level encryption programs. Yet European software producers are free to produce computer encryption codes of all levels of security without providing keys to any government authority. Purchasers of encryption software value security about all else. These buyers will ultimately choose airtight encryption programs that will not be American-made programs to which the U.S. government maintains keys.

In spite of this truism, the president is attempting to foist his rigid policy on the exceptionally fluid and fast-paced computer industry. Furthermore, recent developments in decryption technology bring into question the dynamic of government meddling in this industry. Two weeks ago, the 56-bit algorithm government standard encryption code that protects most U.S. electronic financial transactions, from ATM cards to wire transfers, was broken by a low-powered 90 MHz Pentium processor.

In 1977, when this code was first approved by the U.S. government as a standard, it was deemed unbreakable. And for good reason: There are 72 quadrillion different combinations in a 56-bit code. However, with today's technology these 72 quadrillion different combinations can each be tried in a matter of time.

Two days after this encryption code was broken, a majority of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee voted, in accordance with administration policy, to force American software companies to perpetuate this already compromised 56-bit encryption system - in spite of the fact that 128-bit encryption software from European firms is available on Web sites accessible to every Internet user. Interestingly, European firms can import this super-secure encryption technology (originally developed by Americans) to the United States, but U.S. companies are forbidden by law from exporting these same programs to other countries.

I believe that moving forward with the president's policy or the Commerce Committee's bill would be an act of folly, creating a cadre of government peeping Toms and causing severe damage to our vibrant software industries. Government would be caught in a perpetual game of catch-up with whiz-kid code-breakers and industry advances. Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott has signaled his objection to both proposals" (emphasis supplied)

"....The Clinton administration's paranoid and prurient interest in international e-mail is a wholly unhealthy precedent, especially given this administration's track record on FBI files and IRS snooping. Every medium by which people communicate can be subject to exploitation by those with illegal or immoral intentions. Nevertheless, this is no reason to hand Big Brother the keys to unlock our e-mail diaries, open our ATM records or translate our international communications. (emphasis supplied) "

Thanks to LiquidList for bringing this to our attention.

We have just returned back to Denver from a three day legal seminar in Key West. We spoke on the electronic surveillance changes in the Patriot Act. Others spoke on other aspects of the Act. By the last day, the Patriot Act had been renamed "The Anti-American Act" and Ashcroft was referred to only as "Cardinal Richilieu."

Cardinal Richilieu, for those of you who are not students of history, was prime minister of France under King Louis XIII. The King was considered a weak ruler. "Richelieu filled the void, more or less running the empire via his advice to the king. A clever politician and strategist, Richelieu expanded royal power, punished dissent harshly, and built France into a great European power.....He was made out to be a villain in the Three Musketeers by Alexander Dumas, and since then, his name has "become synonymous with political intrigue and ambitious power "behind the throne."

We think the shoe fits pretty well.

From Working for Change ActForChange : Act Now

"Send an email to President Bush and ask him to renounce and take all action necessary to terminate the new Defense Department "Total Information Awareness" program that would provide government officials with the ability to snoop into all aspects of our private lives without a search warrant or proof of criminal wrongdoing."

The site sends the e-mail for you and through the ACLU, explains the danger the plan poses to civil liberties.

Ted Rall on the TIA (Total Information Awareness Program - TOTALLY IDIOTIC AMERICANS:

"Since most of the data the TIA analyzes relates to loyal American citizens, Total Information Awareness creates the potential for abuse of governmental power on an unprecedented scale. Because it won't track the most likely future terrorists--people who live in, for example, Pakistan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia--it's a waste of money that furthers the illusion that our government is protecting us. Since Sept. 11, George W. Bush has asked us to trade our precious freedoms for a little security. The TIA forces Americans to sacrifice privacy for nothing. "

The ACLU is organizing against Ashcroft. Check out today's Nat Hentoff piece in the Village Voice, The New American Freedom Fighters.

The Racine Journal Times reports that the ACLU is demanding the City of Racine drop charges against 445 people who attended a rave-style Halloween fundraiser for a local theatre group, arguing the citations "violated the partygoers' First Amendment rights to dance and hear music."

If the city does not drop the charges, the ACLU says the city risks " a costly legal battle over the tickets."

We reported on the raid shortly after it happened. Here's the gist of the case, according to a prepared police statement:

"Based on information from the U.S. Customs Service, undercover officers went through the Haunted Theater (Uptown Theater) at 1430 Washington Ave. After the very brief tour, officers were directed to the basement of Tradewinds Village, 1518 Washington Ave., for the party. There they bought Ecstasy and Ketamine." Although only three arrests were made, police issued citations to 445 attendees with a penalty of $968 each for being "patrons of a disorderly house."

Thanks to Pete Karas, CIC of Cims.Com for bringing the update to our attention.

More technology is about to be employed against foreign visitors to the U.S.

"In a high-tech strategy against terrorists, the government will soon begin comparing foreign travelers with digitized photographs and will consider plans to encode their travel documents with personal data that can be read electronically."

"Starting this month, the State Department will relay digital images of foreign travelers to U.S. ports of entry. For the first time, immigration officials will be assured that they are comparing the travelers who stand before them to authentic pictures taken when they applied to visit the United States."

"In addition, Congress may approve legislation to mandate unique, personal identifiers -- such as digitized fingerprints -- on visas that the State Department grants to foreign nationals who wish to travel in this country, as well as on the passports of 29 nations. The bill passed the House on Dec. 19 and enjoys broad support in the Senate. "

Get involved. Oppose the Total Information Awareness Program. (TIA)

The ACLU explains why you should Stop the Government Plan to Mine our Privacy and provides you with a free fax to send to President Bush asking that he reject this latest assault on our privacy rights.

Here are the ACLU's reasons why TIA should be renounced: